A company wants to accept customer emails as cases without installing any agent software behind its firewall, accepting the trade-off of a smaller limit on attachment and message size. Which capability meets this requirement?
- AOn-Demand Email-to-Case, which processes inbound email in the cloud with no locally installed agent, subject to lower size limits. Correct
- BWeb-to-Case, because it forwards every inbound customer email through the website form engine before a case is created.
- CThe standard Email-to-Case agent, because it must be installed locally to receive any inbound email that becomes a case.
- DAuto-response rules, which convert each acknowledgement email that Salesforce sends back to the customer into a new case.
Why A is correct: On-Demand Email-to-Case runs entirely in Salesforce with no agent behind the firewall and trades that convenience for smaller message and attachment size limits, matching the requirement exactly.
Why B is wrong: Web-to-Case handles website form submissions, not inbound email, so it does not turn emails into cases and does not fit the requirement at all.
Why C is wrong: This is tempting, but the standard agent is the option the company is trying to avoid, since it requires software behind the firewall; it does not satisfy the stated constraint.
Why D is wrong: Auto-response rules only send acknowledgement emails to customers; they do not ingest inbound email or create cases, so they cannot deliver this capability.